You responded with an idea, saying that he was in fact replaceable. Then when confronted about how you would replace him, you became non-committal and offered no viable solution. Only that, in theory, a solution was possible.

What? The way you replace him is with one of several available free agents. I didn't come up with the scenario of getting rid of the guy. The obvious solution would have been to compliance buy out, but I don't really care about that.

You weren't forthright in offering your opinion about 'getting rid' of Fleury but when someone else, through the natural progression of discussion, started talking about the different scenarios, you backtracked quickly.

I made it clear what I was talking about. I framed the post with a sentence that explained what I was disagreeing with, then explained why I disagreed with that. I never said anything about getting rid of the guy. Finding a replacement necessitates that the player is already gone or is already set to be leaving.

Idoit40fans wrote:I made it clear what I was talking about. I framed the post with a sentence that explained what I was disagreeing with, then explained why I disagreed with that. I never said anything about getting rid of the guy. Finding a replacement necessitates that the player is already gone or is already set to be leaving.

I get what you were saying and replying to. A few pages back I was blasted for "wanting" to trade Martin when I was only saying if GMRS wants to make major changes we need to dump a fairly high salary. Sometimes in the GM type threads its easy to confuse when someone is saying "what could or would have to happen" in response to a specific post with "what I want to happen".

In my opinion we have 3 options for now through the deadline. First two this is basically our team for the cup run.

1. Trade Nisky, roll with a million maybe a depth deadline pickup.2. Trade Nisky and someone like Glass but then we need a roster spot. That saves only say $500,000 at most plus Nisky's salary compared to option #1.3. Blockbuster deal we don't see coming either clearing tons of cap space or brining back 3 depth wingers for one high salary and someone like Glass.

I think our top 3 line wingers are better now. We need to have defense like 2009, like current Boston.

Team defense, etc.

Kind of disagree, we need depth wingers desperately. Right now our 3rd line wingers pretty much stink, as do our 4th. if they are who we think they are. Assuming Bennett ends up ahead we have our pick of a guy who was untradable....unless traded for actually nothing and less salary, another guy who nobody wanted and took league minimum, DJ, Glass, Adams and Vitale. Ugh, ugh, ugh.

3 couldn't crack our lineup in the playoffs last year.

We could use some back end defense but our top 4 is set and Despres is a lock for 5.

My only point anyways is this is our lineup minus the trade to get us cap compliant from day one to the playoffs unless we have a surprising trade.

Yesterday on Sirius NHL radio, they gave Ray a B- grade. I definitely agreed with everything the one guy said in his review. Namely, why mess with perfect chemistry by bringing in a bunch of established guys and why in the heck support Fleury? The cool thing was that they loved the Sutter-Staal trade which I think was the best Shero could have done in those circumstances as well.

Why were they talking about the Staal trade? If they're doing 2013(or 2012-2013 ratings for that matter), that would have been done the previous year at this time, aka the trade would have been party of the 2011-12 season

RisslingsMissingTeeth wrote:Yesterday on Sirius NHL radio, they gave Ray a B- grade. I definitely agreed with everything the one guy said in his review. Namely, why mess with perfect chemistry by bringing in a bunch of established guys and why in the heck support Fleury? The cool thing was that they loved the Sutter-Staal trade which I think was the best Shero could have done in those circumstances as well.

Thanks for posting this. I missed this part of the segment and can't find anywhere online to listen to it.

Idoit40fans wrote:Why were they talking about the Staal trade? If they're doing 2013(or 2012-2013 ratings for that matter), that would have been done the previous year at this time, aka the trade would have been party of the 2011-12 season

The grade was based on the past season and then the offseason moves to the airing of the broadcase. Sutter played his first season with the Pens so the time to evaluate the quality of the move was correct.

These guys do their homework. They talked of Ray's patience with Martin and the incredible season he gave in return but mentioned that unless the cap goes up a lot, Ray seriously gambled away the future of the franchise on 3 players. It was a solid objective review IMO.